This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
))
c9\
'" >,
··W) VI
}) )£v
lJ' '\
I
I
i i
\.
\ groups and using field data (or data from numerical experiments) to determine the
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND PREVIOUS WORKS
1.1 Introduction
Natural and manmade canals are abundant in the coastal waters of many states.
These canals provide easy access to bays, gulfs and oceans for those living on these
waterways. However, this access creates susceptibility to damage to both fixed and ") floating structures in these canals from storm surge. To properly design structures located within these canals, the characteristics of storm surges within these canals must to be
I
~ quantified.
Many studies have been performed to analytically describe the hydrodynamic
factors of these canals. The shallow water wave equations (presented in Appendix A)
used to describe this motion are nonlinear and rather cumbersome. In order to solve these
equations analytically, they must be linearized. The loss of accuracy resulting from the
linearization process depends, of course, on the magnitude of the nonlinear terms but
under severe storm conditions these can be significant.
Alternatives to solving these
problems analytically include the use of physical models, solving the nonlinear equations
numerically, and performing a dimensional analysis to determine a set of dimensionless
1
I,)
0/\
2
relationship between the groups, etc. If the resources (time and funds) are available
perhaps the best approach to solving a particular problem is to configure a numerical
model for the site and calibrate the model using field data for the system, preferably under
storm conditions. This can be time consuming and costly and many problems (at least in
the early stages of analysis) do not require this level of accuracy. Less accurate (but often
adequate) solutions can be obtained from a dimensional analysis as mentioned above. The
research presented in this thesis attempts to provide the methodology and information
needed to predict the hydrodynamic quantities needed for the design of structures in canal
systems located in tidal waters. The technique used is that of dimensional analysis with
the data necessary to establish the relationships between the dimensionless groups being
provided by numerical experiments. The results are intended for use in preliminary design
computations.
/ To properly design structures located within these canals, it is necessary to
estimate static and dynamic loads, local sediment scour, etc. under design storm
conditions. These quantities depend on the structure type, size and shape, the sediment
properties, the maximum velocities, and water depths at maximum velocities that will
occur during the design storm event. This thesis addresses the problem of estimating the
maximum velocity and water depth at the time of maximum velocity at a point in a given
canal system. The storm surge hydrograph at the mouth of the canal system is assumed
known.
The approach taken was to first analyze the propagation of shallow water waves in
canals with simple geometry to gain insight into the important variables. A computer
3
model was chosen and field measurements of tidal water elevation and depthaveraged velocity were made for a canal system on the southwest coast of Florida. This data was used check the validity of the model and to determine the approximate value of the variables in the model, such as the diffusion coefficient. Some of the variables included in the initial list of pertinent variables were eliminated by these initial tests. The dimensionless groups used in this analysis were formed from the remaining list of variables. Numerical experiments were performed with this model on a variety of canal systems having the same general shape as that shown in Figure 3.1 but with a wide range of values of the width, depth, and length of the main and side canals. The results are presented in the form of families of curves in twodimensional plots. Once the relationships between the dimensionless groups were established, they were tested using the canal system from the field measurements. The results of this test are presented in Appendix C. One of the main advantages of this approach is that a minimum amount of information about the system is needed to estimate what happens throughout the canal system for known conditions at the entrance or mouth of the system.
This chapter outlines the problem being considered and reviews the pertinent literature on this subject. Chapter two develops the dimensionless groups used in the study, presents the model, and describes the field study. Chapter three outlines the numerical experiments performed. In chapter four, the data from the numerical experiments are analyzed and the results are presented in terms of the nondimensional groups. Chapter four also contains conclusions and recommendations for future work on the subject.
4
1.2 Previous Works
The goal of the research presented in this thesis is to establish a methodology for
estimating the maximum depthaveraged velocity and the water elevation above mean sea
level at the time of maximum depthaveraged velocity at any point in a canal system given
the canal layout and a storm surge hydro graph at the entrance to the canal system. The
canals considered in this research are relatively uniform in cross section (width and depth)
and without freshwater inflow. The published research results on the hydrodynamics in
canal systems caused by tidal waves and storm surges does not provide an easy way to
predict the mentioned variables but it does provide insight into the complexity of the
problem. This section lists and briefly describes the more pertinent research on the topic.
Van de Kreeke and Dean (1975) obtain an expression for the tideinduced net
mass transport in a shallow water lagoon of uniform length, open at both ends. The form
of the continuity and momentum equations considered by Van de Kreeke and Dean is
given in Equations 1.1 and 1.2.
8r] oq + = 0
at ox
(1.1)
(1.2)
5
In these relationships, 11 is the water surface elevation, t is time, q is the discharge per unit
width, x is a position along the length of the canal, h is the water depth with respect to
mean sea level, g is the gravitational acceleration, and F is the friction factor. These
nonlinear equations cannot be solved analytically. Therefore, van de Kreeke and Dean
linearized these equations. Their solution for mass transport is given in Equation 1.3.
(1.3)
In this expression q. is the tideinduced mass transport, T the tidal period, L the length of
the canal, ')... the length of the tidal wave, FI the friction factor, Co the wave celerity for
zero friction, a) and a, are the tidal amplitudes at two points in the canal and 6 is the phase
angle difference between the tide at the two ends of the canal, The solution presented is
only for the net mass transport of the system, giving no insight into the motion at different
points in the lagoon. Additionally, the effects of the nonlinear terms (neglected in this
analysis) increase with amplitude. Since surge amplitudes can be ten times the tidal
amplitude and twice the mean water depth, the results of this paper cannot be applied to
the problem considered in this thesis.
Prandle (1986) presents the changes in amplitude as a tidal wave propagates
through an estuary. He uses two different sets of relationships to describe the geometry of
the estuary and solves the following linearized form of the shallow water wave equations:
au + az + SU;;;:: 0 at g ox
(lA)
6
az + l.2_(BhU) :::: 0
at Box
(1.5)
where U is the axial velocity, Z the water elevation, B the breadth, and S the friction
coefficient. One of these sets of relationships has the breadth and depth varying with some
power of the distance, x, into the estuary,
(1.6)
(1.7)
with 1 and HL being the horizontal and vertical dimensions at x = I, respectively. The
other set of relationships has the breadth and the depth varying exponentially with the
distance, x and is:
B(x) :::: BO enx
(1.8)
(1.9)
where the subscript 0 denotes conditions at the mouth. Even though Prandle presents a
description of the motion at points within the system, his analysis is limited to single canals
(i.e., no side canals) and as pointed out above the neglected nonlinear terms can be
significant when the storm surge is large.
Istemi (1979), using the definition of discharge,
7
Q =: VA
(1.10)
where Q is the discharge, A the crosssectional area and V section average velocity,
presents several expressions for predicting the amplitude and the velocity at any point
within a straight canal of uniform crosssection. The following the relationship obtained
for a canal with a rectangular cross section:
n =: 1 +mIJm+l
m F, 2m
(1.11 )
where F 0 is the Froude number of the initial flow and nand m are the ratio of flows and
the ratio of depths at two different cross sections along the canal, respectively. To obtain
these values through the relationships given, the flow at the position in question is
required along with the flow and the depthaveraged velocity at another point. This
information is usually not easily obtained for a surge. Also, the relationships established
by Istemi do not allow for the presence of side canals joined to the system.
Like Istemi, Marche and Partenscky (1972) describe the motion m a simple
shallow water estuary with no contributing side canals. Using linear wave theory, Marche
and Partenscky superimpose an incident and a reflected wave to show how friction
deforms a progressive tidal wave. The following relationship is obtained for water surface
elevation as a function location in the channel, x, and time:
8
where the subscripts 1 and 2 indicate the incident and reflective waves, respectively, G indicates a point along the canal, b is the width of the canal, J.t is the damping coefficient, k is the wave number, o is the tidal frequency, K is the reflection coefficient, and a is the phase angle between the incident and the reflected waves. Partenscky and Barg (1976) use a similar relationship to describe the changes in the damping coefficient and the dissipation of energy that occur as a tidal wave propagates through an estuary. Again, these ID approaches cannot predict the effect of side canals on this motion, and the neglected nonlinear terms can be important when the storm surge is large.
When estimating storm surge induced hydraulics within a given canal system with connecting (side) canals it seems that the only option available, at this point, is to set up and run a computer or physical model. Many papers describing the results of experiments using numerical and/or laboratory models for particular canals exist (see e.g. O'Brien (1972), van de Kreeke (1981), Granat and Brogdon (1990), and USGS (1991). Models are costly and time consuming to setup, run and analyze the output data. In addition, the results from these model studies are unique to the given canal system and storm surge conditions considered. The goal of this research is to provide an alternative to using models when approximate values of the hydraulic parameters are sufficient.
CHAPTER 2
PROBLEM FOIUvruLATION AND ANAL YSIS
2.1 Introduction
s.
As stated in Chapter ~£'the research described in this thesis includes conducting
a dimensional analysis to obtain the dimensionless groups needed to describe the
hydraulics in tidal canal systems. Numerical experiments using a 2D, depthaveraged
computer model was used to establish the relationship between these groups. A field
measurement program was conducted to obtain data needed to validate the model and
determine approximate values of model parameters such as the diffusion coefficient. This
chapter presents the parameters used in the dimensional analysis, describes the computer
model, outlines the field study, and presents the dimensionless groups.
2.2 .Preliminary List of Parameters
The dependent parameters in this study are two of the quantities that are
responsible for damage during a severe storm, i.e. drag force on a structure and
9
10
structureinduced sediment scour of the bed around the structure. The drag force due to steady (or quasi steady) flow can be expressed ast//
(2.1)
where FD is the steady drag force per unit elevation, CD is the drag coefficient, p is the
fluid density, Ac is the projected area per unit elevation of the structure, and U is the far
field velocity.
Local scour near a structure is the result of increased bed shear stress near the
structure caused by the interaction of the structure with the flow. The bed shear stress on
a flat bed away from the structure can be computed by a similar relationship:
(2.2)
where l' is the bed shear stress, u, is the bottom velocity, and f is the friction factor. In
/ the case of waves, the friction factor, f can be expressed asf
f = 80'( v cosh(kh )) 112 gakub
(2.3)
where c is the wave frequency, v is the kinematic viscosity, k is the wave number, h is the
mean water depth, g is the gravitational acceleration, and a is the amplitude.
Sheppard et al. (1995) developed an empirical relationship for computing the
maximum local scour depth near a circular pile:
11
(2.4)
where dse is the maximum equilibrium scour depth, D the diameter of the pile, ~, k., Is, Is,
and k, are empirical coefficients, h the water depth, D the depthaveraged velocity, U, the
depthaveraged velocity required to initiate sediment movement on a flat bed away from
water velocity and depth (consisting of the mean water depth and the storm surge water
surface elevation) as well as the water properties and structure and sediment parameters.
The mean water depth, water and sediment properties and the structure parameters are
usually known or can be measured or estimated. However, the velocity and the water
surface elevation above mean sea level during a storm surge are not as easily obtained.
Estimation of these parameters is the subject of this thesis. Since the canals presented in
this analysis are relatively shallow and are not mass density stratified (and thus do not
experience flow reversal over the water column) and the length of storm surge waves are
relatively large compared to the length of the canal, the storm surge velocity in these
canals will be relatively uniform over the depth. For these conditions a 2D depth
averaged model works reasonably well. As can be seen in the relationships presented in
Equations 2.1, 2.2, and 2.4, the velocity has a greater influence on both drag and scour
than the other quantities (including total water depth). In this analysis the maximum
depthaveraged velocity (V m) and the water surface elevation above mean sea level at the
time of maximum depthaveraged velocity (a.) are the dependent variables. The initial list
12
of variables on which the dependent variables depend (i.e. the initial list of potential
independent variables) is given below.
K,  parameter used to describe the shape of the canal
Ar  the total planview area of the canal system
we  a parameter used to describe the width of the canal system (used for a system in which the width of each side canal differs)
L,  a parameter used to describe the length of the main canal and the side canals
h  the mean depth of the canal
E  the eddy viscosity
n  Manning's n
a  the amplitude of the storm surge at the mouth of the canal (Figure 2.1)
T  the length of time of the storm surge hydrogragh (Figure 2.1)
g  gravitational acceleration
In order to test the sensitivity of the dependent variables to these variables, a 2D
computer model was selected and numerical experiments performed.
13
T (units of time)
Figure 2.1 Storm surge hydrograph
14
2.3 The Computer Model
2.3.1 Description of the Model
( The model used to perform the numerical experiments is the TABS system which was developed by the Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. The i
!
TABS system is a compilation of the RMA2 and RMA4 programs. RMA2 uses the
2D shallow water wave equations found in Appendix A to solve for the depthaveraged
water velocity and the water surface elevation. RMA4 employs the solution computed by
RMA2 to model contaminant transport. Both models use a finite element scheme to
obtain either transient or steady state solutions. RMA4 was not used for this research.
A 2D program was most appropriate for this problem given the 2D nature of
these canals interconnected at various junctions. A ID program could not have provided
a solution to such a problem. Due to the lack of freshwater discharge and, in tum, any
significant depthdependent flow in the canals considered, a 3D model was unnecessary.
RMA2 was chosen because it is a model that has been tested and used by the Army Corps
of Engineers for several years and has a history of good performance.
RMA2 requires two input files for processing: a file which describes the geometry
of the basin and a file that provides the boundary conditions. FastT ABS was used to
create such files. FastT ABS is a pre and postprocessor developed by the Engineering
Computer Graphics Laboratory at Brigham Young University. FastT ABS
15
produces a geometry file of the format used by TABS with geometry information in XYZ
coordinates. These XYZ coordinates were obtained one of two ways. The first was by
either digitizing a real canal system from a map or an aerial photograph. The second was
by producing FORTRAN programs which create the XYZ coordinates of fictitious canal
systems. A boundary condition file, of the correct format used by TABS, containing
water elevation or flow conditions, viscosity, and Manning's n may also be easily
constructed using FastT AB S.
2.3.2 Field Test Used to Verify the Model
Validation of the model was necessary before performing the experiments.
Bathymetry, tidal elevation, and velocity measurements from an actual canal system
located in Punta Gorda, Florida were used for model validation. This canal system is a
man made canal connected to Alligator Creek, 0.7 miles (1.1 km) from Charlotte Harbor.
Figure 2.2 shows the location and geometry of this canal.
Tide gauges were placed at locations A, B, C, and D shown in Figure 2.2. Tidal
elevations were measured for 46 hours, November 2  4, 1994.
Depthaveraged velocities were desired at location A in Figure 2.2. These were
computed from measurements made at four locations across the canal at location A.
Using an electromagnetic velocity meter, velocity measurements were taken at several
depths in these four locations. The measurements were made over a 23 hour period on
November 3 and 4, 1994.
(The crosssectional shape of the canal was assumed to be constant throughout the ~
:'\:, i~') system. A typical cross section was taken at point A by measuring the depth at nine points
0!"~) ~ across the canal. A centerline depth was taken at 130 ft. (40 m.) intervals throughout the ~ .. ~) ~
V)
,JQ ..
D
16
system. To obtain relative bottom elevations, the times of the depth measurements were
recorded and each depth was corrected for the water elevation.
17
PoG.1.
SECTION 16
i~
~p
Figure 2.2 Map of canal system used for field study
18
2.3.3 Model Validation
To validate the model, the field data was converted to a form used by the model, The plan view outline of the model was digitized from an aerial photograph containing latitude and longitude coordinates. This data was input directly into FastTABS. The crosssectional shape used in the model was rectangular. The centerline depth measurements and the typical crosssectional shape was used to establish the depths of the rectangular crosssections at the given points. The crosssectional area was conserved when establishing these depths. Given this bathymetry data, the simple mesh illustrated in Figure 2.3 was constructed using FastTABS.
The tidal flow in the model was driven by a boundary condition file describing the tidal elevations at location A. The output from the model was compared to the tidal elevations recorded at locations B, C, & D and the velocity measurements made at location A.
The two parameters that may be revised to calibrate the model are the eddy viscosity, E and Manning's n. The manner in which these parameters effect the flow can be seen in the governing equation presented in Appendix A. The eddy viscosity appeared to have little effect on the output elevation and velocity. At first, it seemed that using one element across the width of the canal would not allow the model to resolve how E affects the crosssectional velocity profile. So, a second mesh with six elements across the width of the canal was created. The same parameters were used. Again, E had very little effect on the output. The flow parameters appear relatively insensitive to eddy viscosity, E, for low flow velocity situations such as the (low amplitude) tidal flow considered here. For
19
Figure 2.3 Mesh of canal system used in the model
tidal flow, the range of recommended values for E is 100  200 lbsec/ff A value of 100 Ibssec/ff was used in this study.
20
Unlike the eddy viscosity, Manning's n affected the output. According to Chow
(1959) the range of values for a dredged canal is 0.016  0.140. The value that produced
the best fit to the field data was 0.025. The output that best approximates the field data
for the elevation at location D and velocity at location A are shown in Figures 2.3 and 2.4.
As shown in Figure 2.3, little or no attenuation of the amplitude was observed.
2.00 r,
Field Data at Point D FastTABS Output at Point 0
Field Data at Point A
g
C o
1
iii
20.00
40.00
60.00
Time (hrs)
Figure 2.4 Validation of the model elevation at location D
21
0.40 r,
FastT ABS Output Field Data
0,20
0,20
t (
I
I
40,00
50,00
60.00
Time (hrs)
Figure 2.5 Validation of the model velocity at location A
22
2.4 Dimensional Analysis
After selecting the 2D computer model to be used in this study, initial experiments to establish which of the potential variables are most important and thus must be retained in the analysis were performed. As stated above, the dependent variables in this study are the depth averaged velocity (V m ) and the water surface elevation at the time of maximum velocity (a •. ).
Some of the variables such as the period, T, are clearly important but the sensitivity of the maximum velocity and water elevation at maximum velocity to variations in some of the other parameters such as K., ~, we' Lc, h, E, and n, is not quite as obvious.
The shape parameter, K., was analyzed by first determining the energy losses around corners in the canal system. The three canals illustrated in Figure 2.6 were created using FastTABS. All three canals are equal in length, 160,000 ft (48,770 m) and width, 80 ft (24.4m). The same surge, a = 6.4 ft (1.95 m) and T = 17.5 hrs, was imposed at the mouth of each canal. The peak velocities at points along the canal are shown in Figure 2.7. Note that the peak velocities are the same for each system at the same distance from the mouth. To the accuracy of this 2D model, no losses occur due to the configuration of the canal. This result is believed to be due to the large surge wavelength relative to the canal length.
(
23
a) Straight Canal
b) 'LShaped' Canal'
c)'ZigZag' Canal
Figure 2.6 Canals used for analysis of different shape
2J;() _,
2.00 ~
! 1.50 ~
~
s
~ ,.oo~
Q.5()~
0.00
0.00 •
I
I
l
~
• 9JI'iVtl~ fI
• \.Sh_(:MoI
• 'ZiQ<ZtJg'Cord
\ I I I
40000.00 &0:0.00 1:2COCO.OO 1eo:xlO.OO
DIB1.nea from Mouth (ttl
Figure 2.7 Analysis of different shaped canals
Three additional experiments were petformed to help quantify K.. These
experiments resulted in a direct relationship between the planview area and the time series
plot of the flow. As with the canals shown in Figure 2.6, those illustrated in Figure 2.8
were created using FastTABS. All three canals have a plan view area of 4,748,000 ft?
24
(441,100 m'), The lengths and widths of the side canals vary. However, the length of the
main canal and the width of the main canal at the mouth are the same for each system,
26,400 ft (8047 m) and 120 (36.6m), respectively. The same surge, a = 5.25 ft (l.60 m)
and T = 8.75 hrs, was imposed at the mouth of each canal. The time series of the flow at
the mouth plots the same for all three canals as shown in Figure 2.9.
a) Grid 1
c) Grid 3
b) Grid 2
Figure 2.8 Canal systems used for testing the relationship between flow and planview area
(/ The discharge is clearly related to the plan view area into which the surge is propagating and not the shape of the canal system. The following relationship for
S' i
~~. i
( '.~) discharge at maximum velocity at any point x in the canal system appears to fit the data
0' ~OV /
,f:)' i~ , ",::,/ quite well, at least over the range of variables considered: ~
Q(x) = Qo AR(X) AT
(2.5)
where the subscript 0 represents the value at the mouth of the canal system, x represents
2000
1000
25
·1000
o
so
20
40 Time (hrs)
60
Figure 2.9 Results from the analysis of flow versus planview area
a position within the system, AR the planview area remaining between point x and the
end of the canal, Ar the total plan view area of the canal system, and Q is the flow at
peak velocity at point x. This relationship was validated using Grid 3 from Figure 2.8.
Table 2.1 shows the data from this validation. In this table, the positions described with an
'm' are along the main canal, the positions 'described with an 'sl ' are along the side canal
closest to the mouth, and the positions described as Is21 are along the side canal furthest
from the mouth. The position numbers increase with the distance from the mouth.
Using Equation 2.5 and the definition of discharge,
Qo ~ VmAo
(2.6)
Position time of peak flow at peak Qp(x= x)! Ar (fe) Ai AT
velocity (hrs) velocity (cfs) Qp(x = 0)
m1 54.5 1,742 1 4,748,000 1
m2 54.5 1,556 0.89 4,229,600 0.89
m3 54.5 1,394 0.8 3,711,200 0.78
sl1 54.5 412.8 0.24 960,000 0.2
sl2 54.5 173.5 0.1 468,048 0.1
sl3 54.5 0 0 0 0
m4 54.5 1,020 0.59 2,698,400 0.57
m5 54.5 837.5 0.48 2,280,800 0.48
m6 54.5 701.6 0.4 1,892,000 0.4
s21 54.5 179.4 0.1 597,500 0.12
s22 54.5 91.11 0.05 323,358 0.07
s23 54.5 0 0 0 0
m7 54.5 498.4 0.29 1,238,400 0.26
m8 54.5 235.5 0.14 604,800 0.13
m9 54.5 0 0 0 0 26
Table 2.1 AnalYSIS of Equation 2.5
where 1\ is the crosssectional area at the mouth of the canal at the time of peak velocity,
V m' the maximum velocity, at any point in the system may be computed knowing Qo, the
depth at mean sea level, h, the width of the canal, w, and a.. The depth at mean sea
level, h and the width, w, are assumed known. Therefore Qo and a. become the values
desired, or the dependent variables.
The initial tests indicated that (for the range of conditions considered) the
dependent variables are not sensitive to change in K, are sensitive to AR, and that we and
27
L, can be replaced by wand Lm where w is the canal width at the mouth and Lm is the
length of the main canal.
The effect on flow of the parameters, wm' Lm, and h, was then investigated. Using
the same surge for each, a = 5.25 ft (1.60 m) and T = 8.75 hrs, three experiments were
performed varying only one parameter in each experiment from a control system (grid 1 in
Figure 2.8). The results of these experiments are shown in Figure 2.10. As can be seen in
yj)
~' . o.,Figure 2.10, wm and h effect the time series plot of the flow. The negligible effect of Lm :? 8)
J/C{,']I: '0'). on the flow for conditions considered illustrates that even for the shortest period surges
v7 (
)/ ~. ~
v\) (.,0' 0
"._, , ?v
l0 " c\' f) ))Q..;"
~"nv \\;)._{ list of independent variables used in this study.
(7 "J
rt su.'
\(
the wavelength is large compared to the canal length, thus Lm can be eliminated from the
The final list of independent variables to be tested are E, the eddy viscosity, and
Manning's n. Both were tested using grid 1 from Figure 2.6. An E value of 100 lbssec/ff
was used for the experiment shown in figure 2.7. The same experiment was then
performed on the canal with an E value of 200 Ibssec/tr'. These results are shown in
Figure 2.11. Similar to the testing of the model with the measured tides, the velocities do
not appear high enough to warrant an effect by the eddy viscosity.
A Manning's n value of 0.025 was used for the experiment illustrated in Figure 2.7.
The same experiment was then performed with an n equal to 0.050. These results are
given in Figure 2.12. Clearly, Manning's n affects the velocity.
The results of the preliminary numerical experiments suggest that the following
variables are those in which the dependent variables, Qo and a.(x) are most sensitive:
• Ar, the total surface area of the canal system,
28
1000
"§
~ 0
~
u::
1000 50
55
6() SS
TIme (hrs)
10
75
Figure 2.10 Effects of flow on varying w, h, and the length of the main canal
• AR (x), the plan view canal surface area remaining between point x and the end of the canal,
• w, the width of the main canal at the mouth of the system,
• h, the mean depth of the canal system,
• n, Manning' s n,
• a, the amplitude of the storm surge at the mouth of the canal, and
• T, the duration of the storm surge hydrogragh
Application of the Buckingham Pi method for dimensional analysis, results in the
following dimensionless groups:
29
Qo fih = /[1;, ~, ~ , ~ , nJ
w (h+a) gh T.; gh
(2.7)
and
a. I[AR AT W w a J
a = AT' a w' h' "ii' T fih ' n .
(2.8)
Chapter three describes the numerical experiments that were performed for the purpose of
determining the functional relationships between these groups shown in Equations 2.7 and
2.8. Chapter four presents these relationships in two series of plots.
2.50
! 1.50
~
" o
1i
;:. 1.00
2.00
o
•
0.50
0.00
40000.00 80000.00 120000.00
Distance from Mouth (ft)
160000.00
Figure 2.11 Sensitivity analysis of the eddy viscosity
30
2.00
i 1.50
~
"
.2
~ 1.00 0.00
40000.00 80000.00 120000.00
Distance from Mouth (ttl
160000.00
Figure 2.12 Sensitivity analysis of Manning's n
CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTS
,1
In k:haptertwo; the discharge at the mouth of the canal system at the time of peak
velocity (Qo) and the water surface elevation above mean sea level at the time of peak
velocity (a.(x» were established as the two desired variables. The primary independent
variables were also established and found to be Ar, AR (x), W, h, n, a, T, and g.
Application of the Buckingham Pi Theorem resulted in the following relationships:
(2.7)
and
Of the seven independent parameters, all but AR are directly input into the
computer model. A criteria had to be established to select a target range for each
parameter.
Recall from Chapter two that the shape of the canal was shown not to have an
effect on the flow at the mouth. Therefore, the general shape of the canal shown in
31
32
Figure 3.1 was used for all of the experiments. Topographic maps provided by the United
States Geological Survey (USGS) and navigational charts provided by National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) show that most of these canal systems are
similar in planview area to the canal system that was used to test the computer model,
1,245,540 ft2 (115,700 m'). Canal grids were created in the model with a range for A,
of 1,000,000 ff to 11, Ill, III ff (92,900 m2 to 1,032,000 rrr) This range was chosen so
as to accomodate many cases. Ar was varied by changing the lengths and widths of the
main and side canals. The widths of the canals shown on the USGS maps and the NOAA
. ._)V
~ charts seemed to vary from about 80 ft to 150 ft (24.4 m to 45.7 m). A canal more
k) ('~
9·)1] .))"' /. narrow than 80 ft (24.4 m) would hardly be navigable. A range of 80 ft to 400 ft (24.4 m
I~ .» ')
'0'"" 0 0('
isV) b~ to 122 m) was used to ensure a range of the dimensionless groups wide enough to cover
+ '>
/0 V) most cases.
<, .". ......
"I
'f:J..~ ~(} . The NOAA charts indicate that the depths of most canals seem to vary from 5 to 8
, ,;,::;:U
Vi
ft (1.5 to 2.4 m). A canal with an average depth less than 5 ft (1.5 m) would only be
navigable by small boats. An average depth above 8 ft ( 2.4 m) rarely occurs due to the
maintenance dredging costs.
Chow (1959) presents a range of values of Manning's n for a dredged canal. This
range extends from 0.016, for a straight, uniform, clean, recently completed canal, to 0.14,
for an unmaintained canal with dense brush. A range of 0.01  0.14 was used for the
experiments.
Hydrographs of previous storms that occurred along the eastern and southern
coast of the United States provided a range for a and T. Pore, et al. (1974) show the
33
Figure 3.1  Canal shape used in experiments
hydrographs for nine major storm events occurring between Virginia and Maine from 1950 to 1972. Harris (1963) shows the hydrographs for 28 storms occurring between Texas and New York from 1926 to 1961. These papers present a range for the storm
34
amplitude, a of 2 to 10 ft (0.61 to 3.05 m) and a range for T from 5 to 48 hours.
Obviously, an amplitude less than 5 ft (1.5 m) is not of interest because the velocities
generated are on the order of those due to astronomical tides. Most of the hydro graphs
presented by Pore, et al. and Harris were fairly symmetrical around the peak surface
elevation. Therefore with a and T defined as shown in Figure 2.1, the following normal
distribution was used as the model shape for all of the input surges:
(3.3)
where II is the water surface elevation above the mean at time t.
These criteria provide the following range of values for the independent
dimensionless groups:
o < Arl aw < 6000,
o < w/h < 80,
5 < w/a < 40,
0.000002 < a < 0.00004, and
Tfiii
0.01 < n < 0.14.
Appendix B contains 72 tables that present the input for each of the experiments.
As shown in these tables, the ranges for some of the groups were expanded beyond the
limits previously given. This was done to ensure that the results would be correct at the
35
boundaries of the ranges. The ranges were also expanded to provide even numbers that are easily interpolated between when using the data presented.
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
c,
Recall that ~~apter thleloutlined the experiments performed. This chapter uses
the output from these experiments to establish the relationships between the
nondimensional groups in Equations 2.7 and 2.8.
Figures 4.1 thru 4.24 are two dimensional graphs that illustrate the functional relationship shown in Equation 2.7. In each graph, Qo/[ w(h +a)[gh] is plotted versus
Ar Iwa, for three different values of w/h while the remaining groups are held constant. Given this general layout for each graph, the remaining groups, w/a, a/( T /ih), and n, are
each varied between graphs, providing 24 graphs.
The functional relationship in Equation 2.8 proved to be more complicated. For the lower values of Ar Iwa, al( T [iii), and n, a .. la was found to be independent of AiAr,
(i.e. independent of the position along the canal) as shown in Figure 4.25. However, as
these groups increase in value, a .. la becomes dependent on ARI Ar and there is scatter in
the data indicating an important parameter is missing from the analysis in the range (see
Figure 4.26). Omitting the experiments which show scatter provides a safe range for Ar
Iwa. Within this so called safe range, a. la is constant. Tables 4.1  4.3 give safe ranges
for Ar Iwa along with the corresponding values for a .. la.
The scatter in Figure 4.26 suggests that aJa outside of the ranges given in Tables
4.1  4.3 are not completely described by the nondimensional groups given in Equation
36
38
2.5. Tables 4.1  4.3 can then be used to estimate a*. Finally, the maximum velocity can be calculated from the definition of discharge:
(4.1)
An example of the process of estimating maximum velocity was performed using the canal system from the field test used to test the model. This example is presented in Appendix C.
In order to apply this research to a variety of actual storm surge situations, additional research is recommended in three categories. The first, as previously mentioned, is the case in which the surge significantly deforms as it travels through the canal. For that situation, a. can not be predicted using the results of this research. Secondly, surges don't generally display the shape of a perfect normal distribution. More research is needed to deal with different surge shapes. Finally, during a large storm surge, the water elevation can rise above the banks of the canal system. More work is needed in order to extend these results to include this case.
0.06


J:
C)

1::
e
rn

n:I 0.04
+
J:
l'


0
a
0.02 39
0.08
w/a = 6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.14
0.00
: .>
+ ./
w/h = 5
• wlh = 20 V V :
• w/h = 40 /
/'
Y V
/ /
/ ./ /
L _.....Y
V V /"
~ V
~
A~ ~ V .>
>
 ~ v
~
./ o
1500
7500
9000
4500
6000
3000
Figure 4.1
0.20
0.16


J::
tD
 0.12
1::
tr'
(/)

CtI
+
.s::

~ 0.08


0
0 0.04
0.00
40
w/a = 5
a J (T sqrt(gh) )= 0.000015 n = 0.14
~ ~ r.
:
Ii <, I
.>: ~ l,  
/ / V <, .....__
I. _..
// .> T ~.~
./  _.,..
1/ / /'
1/ /
V + w/h= 5
• w/h:: 20
/ • w/h:: 40
7
I I o
1500
4500
7500
9000
3000
6000
AT/wa
Figure 4.2
0.30
0.25

 0.20
.c:
Cl

t::
C"
t/)

.c: 0.15
+
ns
}'


0 0.10
a 0.05
0.00
41
w/a =6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.14
~ ~
/ <.
/ »": ~ r. ....__
/1 <.  r 
I' 
( <, ... ....
I:
, V  r
+
/
P I
I /
+ w/h =5
/1 • w/h = 20
• w/h = 40
V
I I I o
1500
9000
6000
7500
3000
4500
Figure 4.3
0.030
0.025

 0.020
J:
0')

t
C"
tJ)

ctI 0.015
+
J:
~


0 0.010
a 0.005
0.000
42
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.14
+ wlh = 10 )
• wlh = 40 /
• wlh = 80
/
/
/ V /
/ ./ V
/ /'" :
/ / ,/
.>
?_./ 7 l ~
/ 
Ig ~ I
J+ o
4000
6000
2000
AT/wa
Figure 4.4
8000
0.05


.c
0)

~ 0.04
C"
VI

n:I
+
.c
T 0.03


0
a
0.02 43
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.14
0.07

..... 
/ 
/ .> V •
/ .»: Y"
/ J V
/ /
J /
/ / :
/ ! .>
/ I /
/ / : +
w/h = 10
1/ ./ • w/h = 40
~ / • w/h = 80
 0.06
0.01
0.00
a
2000
6000
4000
Figure 4.5
8000
0.10
0.08


..c:
C)
 0.06
1::
D"
til

CIS
+
..c:

~
 0.04

0
a
0.02 0.00
44
w/a = 100
a/ ( T sqr1(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.14
I ..___
( 
/ ~  ~
I / /
»> > ..
I( / :
I ! /
I 1//
II I
+ wlh" 20
III • wlh" 40
• wlh" 80
VI
1'1 o
2000
6000
4000
Figure 4.6
8000
0.030
0.025

 0.020
.c
C,

1::
C"
In
 0.015
n:s
+
.c
~


0 0.010
0 0.005
0.000
45
w/a = 200
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0 14
.
.J
+ w/h '" 10 :
• w/h '" 40 7
• wfh = 80
/ :
V .> V
/
/ : /'
/ :
V :
/
/ / 
/  
/ L

~ ~ ~ o
12000
16000
4000
8000
Figure 4.7
0.06
0.05

 0.04
J:
en

1:'!
0
I/)
 0.03
cu
+
J:
'f


C) 0.02
a 0.01
0.00
46
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.14
»> 
: <,
v  .
/ .>
I /
II II
/ / V
/ / /"" V
/ !/ / /
I / / /'
I / V + w/h = 10
./ • w/h '" 40
/ V • w/h = 80
V
I o
8000
12000
4000
Figure 4.8
16000
0.08
0.06


.s::
C)

t:
0"
tn

n:I 0.04
+
.s:::

;:


0
a
0.02 0.00
47
w/a=6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.08
v
II 1/
+ w/h = 5 V V
• w/h::: 20
• w/h::: 40 ;; [7
y 7
/, ~
_.r ~ V
V >
~
V v ~
~ ~
~ V
~
.> o
1500
7500
9000
4500
3000
6000
Figure 4.9
0.25
0.20


.c:
C)
 0.15
~
D'"
t/)

cu
+
.c:

3:
 0.10

0
a
0.05 0.00
48
w/a = 6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.08
.___,
: .... .___
/ / <,
r,
V 
/ _.. .... _ ~
: <,
/ V <, r,
/
/ V
/
~  ::::::.,
II / V ",.
/
/ / /
/
t /
/ + w/h = 5
.. ".*
• w/h = 20
7' • w/h = 40
I
I I I I o
3000
6000
7500
9000
1500
4500
Figure 4.10
0.30


.t:
Ol 0.25

'I:
0"'
f/J

C1;I 0.20
+
J:
}'

 0.15
0
a
0.10 49
w/a = 6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.08
0.40
[;II  
J r......
I ~ r
r
/ / .....__  ......__ r
fe.....
/1  ...._
r 

I .
rt / ......._ r+
1/
/
~ / + w/h =5
 ///
• w/h = 20
/II • w/h = 40
VV
I I I 0.35
0.05
0.00
o
1500
4500
9000
6000
7500
3000
Figure 4.11
0.035
0.030
0.025


.r:
0')

1:: 0.020
e
I/)

C'CS
+
.s:::::
}' 0.015


0
a
0.010 0.005
0.000
50
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt{gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.08
+ w/h = 10
• w/h = 40
• w/h = 80 ..
.:
/
: V
// V
.> /V
L /" V
: V/ V

V_./ v _ I.,.
/' ....... ~_. ..... ..'''" • .J'.J
~ "" ... __ .'1 ~ ........... '
~ o
2000
4000
6000
Figure 4.12
8000
0.10
0.08


.c
0)
 0.06
1:!
0"
I/)

co:
+
.c

3:
 0.04

0
a
0.02 0.00
51
w/a = 100
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.08
~ ~

: V
.>
L / : v
/ /
/ /
/
/ /
I / V .>
~
;/1 ~ V
./
/; I V + w/h = 10 ,.
/ • w/h = 40
~ ~ • w/h = 80 
I I o
2000
4000
6000
8000
Figure 4.13
0.12


.c
0)

1::
0"
W

cu 0.08
+
.c
l"


0
a
0.04 52
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqr1(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.08
0.16
 r::",
/ v  ~
~ ~ .
/ / V
..
 l
V/ II : ~
/ I /
II VI /
+ wfh::: 20
I II V • wfh '" 40
• wfh::: 80

~ 0.00
o
2000
4000
6000
Figure 4.14
8000
0.030
0.025

 0.020
J:
0)

t:::
C"
II)

C'CI 0.015
+
J:
3'


0 0.010
0 0.005
0.000
53
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.08
/
V
+ w/h = 10 .:
• w/h = 40
• w/h = 80 /
/
~
/ /
Y : /
~  :
V .:
/
/ /'
/ r: ~ 


I~ _____.i .
~ o
8000
12000
4000
Figure 4.15
16000
0.10
0.08


.c
C)
 0.06
t:
C"
!/)

ctI
+
.c
'f
 0.04

0
a
0.02 0.00
54
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.08
 
L v .
1/ V 
../'
/ / V
I / _.A
/1 / / /
/ II /
/ t
II .> »: + w/h = 10
• w/h::; 40
/'" • f
V ~ w/h= 80
I I o
4000
12000
16000
8000
Figure 4.16
0.05
0.04


J:
C)
 0.03
1::
0"
til

(U
+
J:
}"
 0.02
._
0
a
0.01 0.00
55
w/a =6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.01
/
V t>
/ ~ V
V l7 /
/ :
~ y V V
/
.: V /' ./
~ r V
+ w/h = 5 r
tt V • w/h = 20
P • w/h =40 ~
V V
,
I I I o
1500
7500
9000
3000
6000
4500
Figure 4.17
0.70
0.60
0.50


.c
C)

t= 0.40
D"
tI)

as
+
.c

== 0.30


0
a
0.20 0.10
0.00
56
w/a = 6
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.01
1'_
II
/ •
/ V
/ /
/V/
.: V
/, /
....
P V > ,/
L y .> V
/' ,/ ~ V
,
: V V +
~ wlh '" 5
r
~ V • wfh = 20
• wfh '" 40 
~ T
.>
I I I o
1500
4500 AT/wa
6000
7500
9000
3000
Figure 4.18
1.40
1.20
1.00


.c
C)

1:: 0.80
0'"
I/)

«:I
+
.t:
l' 0.60

.._
0
a
0.40 0.20
0.00
57
w/a =5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.01
~ 
/
/
~ .
// ~
//
II _._
f / >
II /" /
j V
J / /"
~
_j 1 / + w/h = 5
:
~ • w/h = 20 r
4 • w/h = 40 r
V ~
I
I I I o
1500
4500
6000
7500
9000
3000
AT/wa
Figure 4.19
0.035
0.030
0.025


J:
0'1

1:::=
C'" 0.020
I/J

C'CS
+
.c
}"' 0.015


0
a
0.010 0.005
0.000
58
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.01
+ will = 10
• will = 40
• will = 80 JI
:
:
/' /'
./ V /
.: V
L ,/'" V
: V/ /
'i v ~ ~
/' 
»: ~ I
~ o
2000
4000
6000
Figure 4.20
8000
0.25
0.20


.c
0')
 0.15
1:
0'"
t/)

«I'
+
.c

::
 0.10

0
a
0.05 0.00
59
w/a = 100
a/ ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.01
J
+ w/h = 10 /
• w/h = 40
• w/h = 80 /
/ / ~
V : :
/ : V
/ : :
~ V  ____..

~ ? ~ ~
____. o
2000
4000
6000
AT/wa
Figure 4.21
8000
0.60
0.50

 0.40
.J:
C)

"t::=
C"
CIJ

co 0.30
+
.J:

3:


0
a 0.20 0.10
0.00
60
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004 n = 0.01
 /
V
/
+ w/h = 20 /
• w/h = 40
• w/h = 80 V /
/
/ /
/
v V
.:
/ /
/ / .>
VL V ~
/'
V V .>: »>
/ ~ V
~ /+ o
2000
6000
8000
4000
Figure 4.22
0.04
0.03


.c:
0')

1::
0
m

n:s 0.02
+
.s:::
"f

..._
0
a
0.01 0.00
61
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002 n = 0.01
+ w/h = 10
• w/h = 40 /
• w/h = 80
/ V
/ V /
V / v
/
/
/ V V
.:
~ y ~ I
. ~
+ ~ o
8000
12000
4000
Figure 4.23
16000
0.30
0.25

 0.20
..c:
0)

1::
cr
I/)

C'I;$ 0.15
+
..c:
l'


0 0.10
a 0.05
0.00
62
w/a = 200
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000016 n = 0.01
/
/
/
+ w/h = 10
/
• w/h = 40
• wfh = 80 L
.
/ L
/ :
/ : v
)
/ : /'
/ .> /
/V/ ,/' ~ 

L v ~ ~
f+ o
4000
12000
8000
Figure 4.24
16000
1.00
O.SO
0.60
...
.
..
DAD
0.20 63
AyIwa" 781 wfa 5
a II T 8qrtjgh) ) " o.oDOD16
nan nR
+ wJhr;:!;,
• wAi .. 20
• wm .... O
• + •
• •• • • •• •
•• •• ~ . ••• • • 0.00
0.00
0.10
1.00
0.20
0.40
O.BD
Figure 4.25 Plot of a.la within recommended range
1.00
o.so
0.60
'"
.
'"
0.40
0.20
0.00 AyIwa" 4687 Wla"6
a II T 8qrtjgh) )" 0.000016
.. 0 08
•
•
• • I
•
+ + •
• • ' . I
. .
•
+ wm .. S
• wfrl=20 r
• wfn_:::,j,O
I
I I 0.00
0.20
1.0B
MO
0.40
D.BO
Figure 4.26 Scatter in a.la as surge travels
64
...
?
w/a a/(T sqrttgh) A/wa wlh a.la
5 0.44
0.000002 < 1736 20 0.34
40 0.24
5 0.51
5 0.000015 < 781 20 0.37
40 0.28
5 0.56
0.00004 < 781 20 0.38
40 0.47
10 0.57
0.000002 <2968 40 0.57
80 0.56
10 0.62
100 0.000015 < 1389 40 0.62
80 0.59
20 0.7
0.00004 < 1389 40 0.7
80 0.61
10 0.58
0.000002 <2968 40 0.57
80 0.53
200 10 0.63
0.000015 < 1389 40 0.58
"" 80 0.61
~ Table4.1 Values for aza with n = 0.14 65
wfa af(T sqrugh) A';wa wlh a.fa
5 0.44
0.000002 <4687 20 0.34
40 0.24
5 0.51
5 0.000015 < 1736 20 0.37
40 0.28
5 0.58
0.00004 < 781 20 0.38
40 0.26
10 0.57
0.000002 <6944 40 0.56
80 0.52
10 0.63
100 0.000015 < 1389 40 0.63
80 0.5
20 0.55
0.00004 < 1389 40 0.65
80 0.61
10 0.57
0.000002 <6944 40 0.66
200 80 0.61
10 0.63
0.00004 < 1389 40 0.62
<, 80 0.58
~able 4.2  Values for «J« with n ~ 0.08 66
> ~
~
w/a a/(T sqrttghj) Alwa wlh a.la
5 0.44
0.000002 < 8681 20 0.34
40 0.24
5 0.52
5 0.000015 < 1736 20 0.38
40 0.24
5 0.44
0.00004 < 1736 20 0.34
40 0.24
10 0.57
0.000002 < 6944 40 0.57
80 0.57
10 0.63
100 0.000015 < 6944 40 0.63
80 0.52
20 0.56
0.00004 <2968 40 0.58
80 0.56
10 0.58
~c 0.000002 <6944 40 0.58
200 80 0.56
10 0.62
0.000015 < 5935 40 0.63
80 0.65
~~able 4.3  Values for a, fa with n = O.oJ APPENDIX A
THE SHALLOW WATER WA VB EQUATIONS
The purpose of this Appendix is to present the shallow water wave equations and
some of the assumptions made in the derivation of these equations. The following are the
shallow water wave equations:
oh o(uh) o(vh)  0
at + Ox + By 
(AI)
in which x and yare the longitudinal and lateral flow directions, respectively; u and v are
the horizontal flow velocities in the x and y direction, respectively; t is time; g is the
gravitational acceleration; h is the water depth; ao is the elevation of the bottom profile; ~
and Eyy are the normal eddy viscosities in the x and y directions, respectively; Exy and Eyx
are the tangential eddy viscosities in the x and y directions, respectively; and C is Chezy's
roughness coefficient which Chow (1959) relates to Manning's n with:
67
68
(A.4)
where R is the hydraulic radius in feet.
Equation A.I is the conservation of mass equation. The equation is derived by
equating the rate at which fluid flows into a small cube of fluid to the sum of the mass
accumulation of fluid in the cube and the mass flux out of the cube. During the derivation,
the equation is expanded by Taylor series and the higher order terms are dropped.
Additionally, the fluid is assumed incompressible, which water essentially is, and the fluid
density is assumed constant.
Equations 4.2 and 4.3 are referred to as the equations of motion. These equations
are derived by using Newton's second law.
All three of these equations have been depth averaged and are intended for motion
under long waves. Therefore, fluid flow is assumed independent of depth. Additionally,
the vertical accelerations are assumed to be relatively small, thus the pressure is assumed
hydrostatic. During the process of depth averaging, a bottom boundary condition and a
kinematic free surface boundary condition are applied. The bottom boundary condition
assumes that the bottom surface is impermeable and the flow is parallel to it. The
kinematic free surface boundary condition assumes that the velocity of the fluid at the
surface corresponds to the direction that the surface is moving. This boundary condition
allows the surface elevation to change according to whatever pattern given.
APPENDIXB
INPUT PARAMETERS FOR THE NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS
The following tables list the input for the experiments performed using the
computer model. Each row in the tables contain the input for each experiment.
Additionally, each table gives the values for the nondimensional groups, w/h, w/a, a/( T Jih), and n.
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/h AT w b a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (brs)
5 11,111,111 80 16 16 97.9 0.14
2,222,222 80 16 16 97.9 0.14
1,000,000 80 16 16 97.9 0.14 Table B.l
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/b AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 195.81 0.14
20 6,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.14
2,222,222 80 4 16 195.81 0.14
1,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.14 Table B.2
69
w/a=5
a I (T sqrttgh) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/h AT w b a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 276.91 0.14
40 6,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.14
2,222,222 80 2 16 276.91 0.14
1,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.14 Table B.3
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/b AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 so 4 16 26.11 0.14
20 e.ooo.ooo so 4 16 26.11 0.14
6,000,000 so 4 16 26.11 0.14
2,222,222 so 4 16 26.11 0.14
1,000,000 so 4 16 26.11 0.14 Table B.5
w/a=5
a I (T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.14
w/b AT w b a T n
(fr) (ft) (ft) [ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 so 16 16 4.9 0.14
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.14
6,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.14
2,222,222 80 16 16 4.9 0.14
1,000,000 so 16 16 4.9 0.14 Table B.7
70
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
wlb AT w b a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 so 16 16 13.05 0.14
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.14
6,000,000 so 16 16 13.05 0.14
2,222,222 80 16 16 13.05 0.14
1,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.14 Table BA
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/b AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 so 2 16 36,92 0.14
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.14
6,000,000 so 2 16 36,92 0,14
2,222,222 80 2 16 36.92 0.14
1,000,000 80 2 16 36,92 0.14 Table B.6
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.14
w/b AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 9.79 0.14
20 8,000,000 so 4 16 9,79 0,14
6,000,000 so 4 16 9.79 0.14
2,222,222 80 4 16 9,79 0.14
1,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.14 Table B.8
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.14
wlh AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 13.85 0.14
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 0.14
6,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 0.14
2,222,222 80 2 16 13.85 0.14
1,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 0.14 Table B.9
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 4 30.96 0.14
4,748,000 400 10 4 30.96 0.14
2,222,222 400 10 4 30.96 0.14 Table B.II
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
11 = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T 11
(ft') (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 40 4 2.06 0.14
10 4,748,000 400 40 4 2.06 0.14
2,222,222 400 40 4 2.06 0.14 Table B.13
71
w/a = 100
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
11 = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 4 15.48 0.14
4,748,000 400 40 4 15.48 0.14
2,222,222 400 40 4 15.48 0.14 Table B.IO
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
will AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 4 43.78 0.14
4,748,000 400 5 4 43.78 0.14
2,222,222 400 5 4 43.78 0.14 Table B.12
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
11 = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 10 4 4.13 0.14
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.14
6,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.14
4,748,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.14
2,222,222 400 10 4 4.13 0.14 Table B.14
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 5.84 0.14
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.14
6,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.14
4,748,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.14
2,222,222 400 5 4 5.84 0.14 Table B.I5
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T 11
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 10 4 1.55 0.14
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.14
6,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.14
4,748,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.14
2,222,222 400 10 4 1.55 0.14 Table B.I7
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
11 = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 2 7.74 0.14
4,748,000 400 40 2 7.74 0.14
2,222,222 400 40 2 7.74 0.14 Table RI9
72
w/a = 100
a / ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
11 = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 20 4 1.09 0.14
20 8,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.14
6,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.14
4,748,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.14
2,222,222 400 20 4 1.09 0.14 Table B.I6
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 2.19 0.14
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.14
6,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.14
4,748,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.14
2,222,222 400 5 4 2.19 0.14 Table B.I8
w/a = 200
a / ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 15.48 0.14
4,748,000 400 10 2 15.48 0.14
2,222,222 400 10 2 15.48 0.14 Table B.20
w/a = 200
a I (T sqrttgh) = 0.000002
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T 11
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 2 21.89 0,14
4,748,000 400 5 2 21.89 0.14
2,222,222 400 5 2 21,89 0.14 Table B.21
w/a =200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 2.06 0.14
4,748,000 400 10 2 2.06 0.14
2,222,222 400 10 2 2.06 0.14 Table B.23
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w II a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
5 11,111,111 80 16 16 97.9 0.08
2,222,222 80 16 16 97.9 0.08
1,000,000 80 16 16 97.9 0.08 Table B.25
73
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 2 1.03 0.14
4,748,000 400 40 2 1.03 0.14
2,222,222 400 40 2 1.03 0.14 Table B.22
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.14
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 2 2.92 0.14
4,748,000 400 5 2 2.92 0.14
2,222,222 400 5 2 2,92 0.14 Table 8.24
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 195.81 0.08
20 6,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.08
2,222,222 80 4 16 195.81 0.08
1,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.08 Table 8.26
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fr') (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 276.91 0.08
40 6,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.08
2,222,222 80 2 16 276.91 0.08
1,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.08 Table B.27
w/a=5
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 26.11 0.08
20 8,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 0.08
6,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 0.08
2,222,222 80 4 16 26.11 0.08
1,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 0.08 Table B.29
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (brs)
11,111,111 80 16 16 4.9 0.08
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.08
6,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.08
2,222,222 80 16 16 4.9 0.08
1,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.08 Table B.31
74
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
wlh AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 16 16 13.05 0.08
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.08
6,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.08
2,222,222 80 16 16 13.05 0.08
1,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.08 TableB.28
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrugh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 36.92 0.08
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.08
6,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.08
2,222,222 80 2 16 36.92 0.08
1,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.08 Table B.30
w/a=5
a / (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 9.79 0.08
20 8,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.08
6,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.08
2,222,222 80 4 16 9.79 0.08
1,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.08 Table B.32
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 13,85 0,08
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 13,85 0,08
6,000,000 80 2 16 13,85 0,08
2,222,222 80 2 16 13.85 0,08
1,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 0,08 TableB,33
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fr') (ft) (ft) (ft) (brs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 4 30,96 0.08
4,748,000 400 10 4 30.96 0,08
2,222,222 400 10 4 30.96 0.08 Table B,35
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 40 4 2,06 0,08
10 4,748,000 400 40 4 2.06 0.08
2,222,222 400 40 4 2.06 0,08 Table B.37
75
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 4 15.48 0.08
4,748,000 400 40 4 15.48 0.08
2,222,222 400 40 4 15.48 0.08 Table B.34
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 4 43.78 0.08
4,748,000 400 5 4 43.78 0.08
2,222,222 400 5 4 43.78 0.08 Table B.36
w/a= 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
1l,1l1,ill 400 10 4 4.13 0.08
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 0,08
6,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.08
4.74~000 400 10 4 4.13 0.08
2,222,222 400 10 4 4.13 0.08 Table B,38
w/a= 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.08
wlh AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 5.84 0.08
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.08
6,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.08
4,748,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.08
2,222,222 400 5 4 5.84 0.08 Table B.39
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
wlh AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 10 4 1.55 0.08
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.08
6,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.08
4,748,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.08
2,222,222 400 10 4 1.55 0.08 Table B.4l
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 2 7.74 0.08
4,748,000 400 40 2 7.74 0.08
2,222,222 400 40 2 7.74 0.08 Table B.43
76
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
w/h AT w II a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 20 4 1.09 0.08
20 8,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.08
6,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.08
4,748,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.08
2,222,222 400 20 4 1.09 0.08 Table B.40
w/a= 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 2.19 0.08
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.08
6,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.08
4,748,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.08
2,222,222 400 5 4 2.19 0.08 Table B.42
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 15.48 0.08
4,748,000 400 10 2 15.48 0.08
2,222,222 400 10 2 15.48 0.08 Table B.44
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
11 = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T 11
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 1l,111,111 400 5 2 21.89 0.08
4,748,000 400 5 2 21.89 0.08
2,222,222 400 5 2 21.89 0.08 Table B.4S
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
11 = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T II
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 2.06 0.08
4,748,000 400 10 2 2.06 0.08
2,222,222 400 10 2 2.06 0.08 Table B.47
w/a=5
a / (T sqrttgh) = 0.000002
11 = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T II
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
5 11,111,111 80 16 16 97.9 0.01
2,222,222 80 16 16 97.9 0.01
1,000,000 80 16 16 97.9 0.01 Table B.49
77
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
11 = 0.08
w/h AT w h a T II
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 1l,1l1,111 400 40 2 1.03 0.08
4,748,000 400 40 2 1.03 0.08
2,222,222 400 40 2 1.03 0.08 Table B.46
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
11 = 0.08
wlh AT w h a T II
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 2 2.92 0.08
4,748,000 400 5 2 2.92 0.08
2,222,222 400 5 2 2.92 0.08 Table B.48
w/a=5
a / ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
wlh AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
u.m.ui 80 4 16 195.81 0.01
20 6,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.01
2,222,222 80 4 16 195.81 0.01
1,000,000 80 4 16 195.81 0.01 TableB.50
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
0.08 AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
0.08 1l,111,111 80 2 16 276.91 O.oI
6,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.01
2,222,222 80 2 16 276.91 0.01
1,000,000 80 2 16 276.91 0.01 Table B.51
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
wlh AT w h a T n
(fe) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 26.11 om
20 8,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 0.01
6,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 om
2,222,222 80 4 16 26.11 0.01
1,000,000 80 4 16 26.11 0.01 Table B.53
w/a= 5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 16 16 4.9 O,ol
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 0.01
6,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 om
2,222,222 80 16 16 4.9 0.01
1,000,000 80 16 16 4.9 om Table B.S5
78
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
wlh AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 16 16 13.05 0.01
5 8,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.01
6,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.01
2,222,222 80 16 16 13.05 0.01
1,000,000 80 16 16 13.05 0.01 Table B.52
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 36.92 0.01
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.01
6,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.01
2,222,222 80 2 16 36.92 am
1,000,000 80 2 16 36.92 0.01 Table B.54
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 4 16 9.79 0.01
20 8,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.01
6,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.01
2,222,222 80 4 16 9.79 0.01
1,000,000 80 4 16 9.79 0.01 Table B.56
w/a=5
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ftl) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 80 2 16 13.85 0.01
40 8,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 O,ol
6,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 om
2,222,222 80 2 16 13.85 0.01
1,000,000 80 2 16 13.85 0.01 Table B.S7
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
will AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 4 30.96 0.01
4,748,000 400 10 4 30.96 0.01
2,222,222 400 10 4 30.96 0.01 TableB.S9
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrttgh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ft') (ft) (ft) (ft) (hI'S)
11,111,111 400 40 4 2.06 0.01
10 4,748,000 400 40 4 2.06 0.01
2,222,222 400 40 4 2.06 0.01 Table B.61
79
w/a= 100
a I ( T sqrttgh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ftl) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 4 15.48 om
4,748,000 400 40 4 15.48 0.01
2,222,222 400 40 4 15.48 0.01 Table B.S8
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
wlh AT w h a T n
(ftl) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hI'S)
80 11,111,111 400 5 4 43.78 0.01
4,748,000 400 5 4 43.78 0.01
2,222,222 400 5 4 43.78 0.01 Table B.60
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
II = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ftl) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hI'S)
11,111,111 400 10 4 4.13 0.01
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.01
6,000,000 400 10 4 4.13 om
4,748,000 400 10 4 4.13 0.01
2,222,222 400 10 4 4.13 0.01 TableB.62
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 5.84 0.01
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.01
6,000,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.01
4,748,000 400 5 4 5.84 0.01
2,222,222 400 5 4 5.84 0.01 Table B.63
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gb) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 10 4 1.55 0.01
40 8,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0,01
6,000,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.01
4,748,000 400 10 4 1.55 0.01
2,222,222 400 10 4 1.55 0.01 Table B.65
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 2 7.74 0.01
4,748,000 400 40 2 7,74 0.01
2,222,222 400 40 2 7.74 0.01 Table B.67
80
w/a= 100
a I (T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 20 4 1.09 0.01
20 8,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.01
6,000,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.01
4,748,000 400 20 4 1.09 0.01
2,222,222 400 20 4 1.09 0.01 Table B,64
w/a = 100
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.00004
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
11,111,111 400 5 4 2.19 0.01
80 8,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.01
6,000,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.01
4,748,000 400 5 4 2.19 0.01
2,222,222 400 5 4 2.19 0.01 Table B.66
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 15.48 0.01
4,748,000 400 10 2 15.48 0.01
2,222,222 400 10 2 15.48 0.01 Table B.68
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000002
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (Ius)
80 11,111,111 400 5 2 21.89 0.01
4,748,000 400 5 2 21.89 0.01
2,222,222 400 5 2 21.89 0.01 Table B.69
w/a = 200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
II = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
40 11,111,111 400 10 2 2.06 0.01
4,748,000 400 10 2 2.06 0.01
2,222,222 400 10 2 2.06 0.01 Table B.71
81
w/a =200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
10 11,111,111 400 40 2 1.03 0.01
4,748,000 400 40 2 1.03 0.01
2,222,222 400 40 2 1.03 0.01 TableB.70
w/a =200
a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) = 0.000015
n = 0.01
w/h AT w h a T n
(ff) (ft) (ft) (ft) (hrs)
80 11,111,111 400 5 2 2.92 0.01
4,748,000 400 5 2 2.92 0.01
2,222,222 400 5 2 2.92 0.01 Table B.72
APPENDIXC
EXAMPLE CALCULATION OF VELOCITY
Two experiments were performed with the computer model using the same canal
that was used to test the model. These experiments were used to test the results of this
research and to provide direction for using the results of this research.
The storm surge amplitude and period for both experiments were 10 ft (3.048m)
and 15 hours, respectively. Manning's n for the first experiment was 0.025 and 0.08 for
the second experiment. The velocity was monitored and computed at two different points
within the canal. These locations are shown in Figure C. 1 as points A and B.
Figure C.l ~ Locations in canal where velocity was monitored for example calculation
82
83
Input parameters were:
Ar = 1,245,540 ff (115,700 m2), w = 90 ft (27m),
h = 5.2 ft (1.6m),
a = 10 ft (3.0m),
T = 15 ft, and
n = 0.025 or 0.08.
These were used to compute the values of the dimensionless groups:
A/wa= 1380, w/h=17, w/a=9,
a/( T Jih) :;:: 0.000014, and
n= 0.025 or 0.08.
Using the values calculated for Ar/wa and w/h, values for Qo/[w(h+a)jgh] were taken
from Figures 4.9  4.24 and are listed in Table C.l.
~
,7
Figure w/a a / ( T sqrt(gh) ) n Qol (w(h+a) sqrttgh)
4.9 5 0.000002 0.08 0.0055
4.10 5 0.000015 0.08 0.055
4.11 5 0.00004 0.08 0.205
4.12 100 0.000002 0.08 0.0015
4.13 100 0.000015 0.08 0.011
4.14 100 0.00004 0.08 0.020
4.15 200 0.000002 0.08 0.00075
4.16 200 0.000015 0.08 0.0060
4.17 5 0.000002 0.01 0.0006
4.18 5 0.000015 0.01 0.050
4.19 5 0.00004 0.01 0.130
4.20 100 0.000002 0.01 0.0013
4.21 100 0.000015 0.01 O.OlD
4.22 100 0.00004 0.01 0.040
4.23 200 0.000002 0.01 0.0005
4.24 200 0.000015 0.01 0.005
Table C.I  Values for Qo/[ w(h +a)fgh] from Figures 4.9  4.24 84
Next, an interpolation was performed to find the correct value for Qo/[w(h+a)fgh] given w/a = 9 and a/(rfgh) = 0.000014. In order to determine whether a linear interpolation between the values for w/a and a / ( t fgh) would be correct, the values given in Table C.1 were plotted in Figures C.2 and C.3.
0.20
:E'
.9 0.15
t::
0
Ol
s
..c
l' 0.10
'0
a
0.05 0.25
ATlwa = 1384 w/h = 17
I
i + wli II' 5; n " 0.01
• ",1t100;n0.01 /
• wla wS;n. (L08
i • wit 100; n  0.08
/
V
/ .l'
V : V
/
V V
:/ V
/' »: ~ ~
V  
L "
.. ' 0.00
0.000000 0.000010 0.000020 0.000030 0.0000<10 0.000050
a I ( T sqrt(gh) )
FigureC.2 Interpolation of Qo/[w(h+a)jgh] using a/(r.[ih)
Figure C.2 shows that the relationship between Qo/[ w(h+a)fgh] and a/( t fih) may not always be linear. However, for at (r fih) < 0.000015, a linear interpolation would give a close estimate. Using Figure C.2, the values for Qol[ w(h+a).[gh] were obtained for
w/a = 5 and 100 and a/( T fih) = 0.000014. The values for Qo/[ w(h +a)fihJ where w/a
85
= 200 and a/( T fih) = 0.000014 were obtained using linear interpolation. These values for Qo I[ w(h +a)fih] are displayed in Table C.2. Figure C.3 is a plot of Qo/[ w(h +a)fih]
versus w/a using the values in Table C.2.
>
w/a n Qol (w(h+a) sqrt(gh) )
5 0.08 0.050
100 0.08 0.007
200 0.08 0.0056
5 0.01 0.045
100 0.01 0.009
200 0.01 0.005 Table C.2  Values for Qo/[ w(h+ a)fih] given Nwa = 1380, w/h = 17 and a/( T fih) = 0.000014
0.04
"£
til 0.03
~
:r
<i'
1:
J' 0.02
d
0.01 Ar/wa = 1384 w/h = 17
a I (T sqrt(gh)) = 0.000014
0.05
1
\
\
~
\ + n"O.Ot
• n O.M
,
'\ I\.
'\ ,
....... r r. 0.00
o
40
160
200
80
120
w/a
Figure C.3 Interpolation of Qo / [ w(h + a) Jih] using w/a
86
For the particular values of the dimensionless groups tested, Qo/[w(h+a)[gh] does not differ much when n = 0.01 and n = 0.08. Therefore, given wla = 9, Qo/[ w(h +a)[gh] =
0.0425 for the case when n = 0.025 and the case when n = 0.08. Using the input
parameters, Qo was computed as 752 cfs (21300 Lis).
Next, Equation 2.5 was used to find the flow at the given locations in the canal
system.
Q(x) = Qo AR(x) AT
(2.5)
For location A, AR is the remaining planview area in the side canal, 44,600 ft? (4140 nr')
in this case. Using the values given for Ar and Qo and Equation 2.5, Q(A) was found to
be 27 cfs (765 Lis). Likewise, AR for point B is the planview area of the main canal from
B to the end of the canal plus the areas of the side canals from location B to the end of the
main canal. AR(B) equals 362,000 ft?(33,600m2), and Q(B) is 218 cfs (6170 Lis).
Next, a)a was obtained using a procedure similar to that used to obtain Qo' Figure
C.4 is a representative plot of the relationship between «J« and w/h. As can be seen in
Figure C.4, this relationship is not quite linear. However, a linear interpolation between
the points given did provide a good estimate of the value. With this and similar plots, the
values for a.la listed in Table C.3 were obtained. Note that, the values for a.la are
virtually the same for Manning's n equal to 0.01 and 0.08. Recall that for the correct
values of a*/a, Ar/wa must be within the limits defined in Tables 4.1  4.3. Due to this
limitation, the final values for a*/a must be computed using a linear interpolation of the
values given in Table C.3. Therefore, with the given values of the input dimensionless
87
1.00
w/a=6 n = 0.08
0.80
r
+ a I ( T sqrt(gh)) ;;; 0.000002
• a I ( T sqrt(gh)) ;;; 0.000015 I
• a I ( T sqrt(gh)) ;;; 0.00004
r.
~ ~
' :::::...
 ~ ~
~
';:__ .
i""'
. 0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
o
20 w/h
10
30
40
Figure C.4 Interpolation of a.la using w/h
groups, a.la was found to be OAO for all three values of n, 0.01,0.08 and 0.025. Since the
input storm amplitude (a) is 10 feet (3.05 m), a .. is 4 feet (1.22m) for these values of n.
The maximum velocity, (Vm(x», can now be calculated using the input parameters,
Qo, a., and Equation (1.10). The relationship used to compute V m{x) is:
Q(x)
Vm{x):;;: (h )
w +a*
(C.1)
88
w/a a I ( T sqrt(gh) ) a.la
5 0.000002 0.36
5 0.000015 0.39
100 0.000002 0.57
100 0.000015 0.63 Table C.3  Values for a./a for n = 0.01 and 0.08
The values computed for V m(x) ar~
YmCA) = 0.033 ftls (0.010 m/s) for n = 0.025 and n= 0.08
and
Vm(B) = 0.18 ft/s (0.055 mls) for n = 0.025 and n= 0.08.
Thc results from the computer model arl
YmCA) = 0.034 ft/s (O.OIOmls) for n = 0.025, V meA) = 0.035 ft/s (0.010 mls) for n = 0.08,
V m(B) = 0.21 ftls (0.064 mls) for n = 0.025, and
YmCA) = 0.20 (0.061 mls) ft/s for n = 0.08.
REFERENCE LIST
Chow, Ven Te (1959) "OpenChannel Hydraulics]' McGrawHill Book Company, Inc;; !/uJfrl
...p_J..tL :r
'I Granat, Mitchell A. and Brogdon, Noble 1. (1990) "Cumberland Sound and Kings Bay
Pre Trident and Basic Trident Channel Hydrodynamic and Sediment Transport Hybrid Mode ing Vol. 1 tI Technical Report HL9021, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineer~ fat:.L "' \ <.)(;>D0'9 ) 177 ~
Harris, D. Lee (1963) "Characteristics of Hurricane Storm Surge" Technical Report No. 48, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Weather Burea~ /It;$;;litfY;~ 7JC.
Istemi, Unsal (1979) "Graphical Determination of the Height of Surge Wave 51 Ocean Engineering Vol. 6, p. 517526.
Marche, Claude and Partenscky, HansWerner (1972) "Deformation of Tidal W~es in
Shallow Estuarie_51 13th Coastal Engineering Conference Proceedings, jJlo~'<7 Va. rG.'1' ) ve t: p. 24052421.
O'Brien, M.P. (1972) "Field and Laboratory Studies; Navigation Channels of the
Columbia River Estua:5 13th Coastal Engineering Conference Proceedings, YfRLe..... VJJ"f(X )/C'r
p.24752498. I ~(" coOOJ_tc\
Partenscky, HansWerner and Barg, Gunter (1976) "Energy Dissipation in Tidal \
. "'h ~ {\ON)\v)\)) h
Estuamj)' lilt Coastal Engineering Conference proceedingsLP. 13121320.
'S: ~lJ6tJel
( Pore, N. Arther, Richardson, William S., and Perrotti, Herman, P. (1974) "Forecasting
/l)\o Extratropical Storm Surges for the Northeast Coast of United State~1 Technical 0J
C\ \ ' Memorandum NWS TDL50, National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministratioIJ ;J14i!.c?'
<:z \t J~t v..::b.~h'f\q~o() f D.C ,
X\ ~ Prandle, D. (1986) "Generalised Theory of Estuarine Dynamic~IKhysics of Shallow Water
D Estuaries and Bays, Springer Verlag)~
L'ler //1/; 40' ¥ L ,jZ
Sheppard, D. Max, Zhao, Gang and Ontowirjo, Budianto (1995) "Local Scour Near Single Piles in Steady Currents" ASCE Conference on Water Resources
Engineering) ·Plat!e.. .
~..)Qn fill ~0'\ I (')
89
90
United States Geological Survey (1991) "Simulation of the Effects of Proposed Tide Gates on Circulation, Flushing and Water Quality in Residential Canals, Cape Coral, FL" OpenFile Report 91237.
Van de Kreeke, Jacobus (1981) "Residual Flow in a Sea Level Canal; The Eendracht, 'iJk
Netherlands)' TR813, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science,) 'tide, (.L
/ 1'('\\0\1
Van de Kreeke, Jacobus and Dean, Robert G. (1975) "Tide Induced Mass Transport in X
Lagoon}' Journal of the Waterways, Harbours, and Coastal Engineering Division, c)()/ :1 D I p. 393401.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
During the Pogrums' of 1908, the Harburgs immigrated from Russia in great fear because of their Jewish heritage to Ireland. Upon immigrating to the isle, the author's grandparents shortened their name to Harr to prevent a recurrent event. A small child was born into the Harr family in 1967. This child found herself deep within a maze of bitter politics. With the IRA bombings, the British government's retaliation, the northern Protestant conflict with the southern Catholics, and the impoverished bankrupt economy, Dublin was no place to advertise that one was a Jew. Once again, a Harr had found reason to take up residence within a new country and find a new homeland. In an effort to survive in a new culture, the author found refuge in the universal language of mathematics and science.
91
II
<t
())l()) OJI())
r+ <: r+ ~
+ + tr:
~ c ~
())I()) ())1Cl>
X <: x ~ ~
+ + I
<: < ~
0
OJI()) ())I())
~ <: ~ c ~
+ +
(Jq (Jq ~
r=">: ~
()_)]()) OJI())
~ ::r' X ::r'
+ + ~
• • c» c» OJ c» OJjOJ
PJ PJ r+ ::r' (D
~ 0 X 0
~ < ~ ~ + ~
~ (D I I OJ
.......... ,,...., ~
0 c»
CD tT1 m x ~
0 ::r'
~ ......... "0 "< "0 X '..._/
o: q x x + ~
~
c» c» c» ()_) <
~ ~ X N >:: N OJ
~ ,,....,
~ N < tv C c» < ('D
"< ::r'
0 0 I
(D ~ '..._/ rn
CD < m m II
u "< "0 >::
.......... <;» "< "< 0 ~
CD
< <» OJ Q) c» ~
~ ~ N '< N
I.'.) < tv ~ ~
.........
0 + + ~
~ n ~.
(Jq n (Jq 0
~ I.'.) < tv c
pj ::r' ::r' ~
0
<:« tr:
~ ~
I.'.) tv
+ +
< <:
I.'.) tv
II II
0 0 I
... ). V1 ~ U ,..,.
~ ~ <r: ~ ~'' ~ ~
~ .
~ cj ~ co • • • •
91 NOII03S ·.·8<J
o cd • •
.t~
e.
~ ~
~ ~
~
II
C'd~ I C\l
~
~ 0 0 0
1~ 7 CO
II II
d (l) ..s::: ..s::: ..s:::
8 II ~ ...__ ~ ...__
cO~ (l) ~ ~
I ~ d
II ~
II
~I cO ~ ~ ,+ • • "' ;
\ \ 1\
r\
\ \ \
~
\ \ \
\
\ , \
G .
. "'... !'.
~ ~, <, \
r.
....
~ ~ ....... ,
'"11 > ,
..........
~~~
0 co (D .q N 0
.;;: 0 0 0 '0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
~
0 ,.....
(.'j
CI +
...c:
"'"
3: o o o co
o o o (0
o o o N
o
7:. t, \D N Cf) Cf) Lf) io Ln ~
C\l C\l io io U) \D \D . U) \D \D
. . . . . 0 . . .
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ ..qt 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ ..qt 00
~ ro ..qt 0\ 0\
~ 00 00
~ ~ Cf) cD
\D ~ ~
V V V
~ N Lf) ~
0 ~ 0
cj 0 0 a
a 0 a
H a 0 0
a 0 .
. . 0
0 a
~~
0
~ cd 0
~